Blog Essay Week 4

EJ Chapter Two

I want to believe whatever government officials say, but situations like what occurred with the Pentagon Papers, cause me to be skeptical. As politicians blabber on, I always think to myself, what are they not telling us? However, this may be a result of watching Olivia Pope and her gladiators on “Scandal.”

Kovach and Rosenstiel say that “journalism’s first obligation is to the truth.” The question is, what is the truth? If a politician tells you he has never been unfaithful to his wife, and you report what he said, are you being truthful? What if he has cheated on her? Should you write what the politician told you is the truth or should you investigate the situation for yourself?

I wonder how the journalists who covered President Clinton felt after reporting on his denial of an affair with Monica Lewinsky, followed several months later by an admission to what he had done. Fellow Democrat John Edwards took a page out of Clinton’s book when he originally denied his extramarital affair.

From the time of preliterate societies, people have looked to a special type of people to provide them with news. People placed and continue to place their trust into obtaining accurate information from these messengers and journalists. Since I was in middle school, I have followed 13 WHAM, a station based out of western New York where I live. Whether it was looking for an update about a possible snow day or reporting on my varsity cheerleading squad, this was the news source I trusted.

It is downright scary that governments and other power players can use their power to shape public perception. Seeing what is happening in Kiev turns my stomach. Technology can make our lives easier, but those who are in power can use it for control. My father’s girlfriend is currently in Kiev, so I am hoping she stays safe in these troubling times.

Reflecting on the earliest newspapers across the world and their dedication to truth, I wonder what reading uncensored and unfiltered material was like. I am going to take an educated guess that these reporters did not engage in quote approval.

It seems telling that journalism was able to gain its first mass audience by emphasizing sensational crime, scandal and celebrity gossip. The foundation for publications like the National Enquirer was set early. It is laughable that Hearst’s Journal and Pulitzer’s World prided themselves on truthfulness and accuracy. A little something called the Spanish American War comes to mind.

News should be about revealing the truth to the public. In a perfect world, we would not have to question whether what we see on the news is true. We no longer live in a world where we listen to Uncle Walter every night. Instead, our generation has witnessed various journalistic scandals, including Jayson Blair and Dan Rather.

This is not to say that delivering the truth is difficult. The truth is complicated and multi-faceted. The Florida Gators defeated Tennessee at the basketball game on Saturday. This is 100 percent true. However, there are different ways to tell this story; consider the Florida perspective versus the Tennessee viewpoint.

It is disheartening that reputable journalist Ted Koppel called journalism schools “an absolute and total waste of time.” I am choosing to believe he is referring to sub-par programs that pale in comparison to what is offered at the University of Florida College of Journalism and Communications.

Instead of hiding behind slogans and overused metaphors, journalists should be honest and forthright with the public about how they aspire to report the truth.  A 2011 study from the Pew Research Center showed that only 25 percent of those surveyed thought news organizations get the facts right. Maybe, if we pulled back the curtain on our procedures, this percentage would rise.

I am in complete agreement with the Hutchins Commission and how they said, “It is no longer enough to report the fact truthfully. It is now necessary to report the truth about the fact.” This reminds me of last week’s case study involving the discrepancies between what the mayor and councilman said. If there are contradictory interpretations, we should not focus on getting the “he said” and “she said” correct. We need to look into what is actually going on, so the truth can be reported on.

Being an investigator is part of our duties as journalists. If you simply want to report exactly what is told to you without looking into the details, you should look into being a stenographer. Every story will not require you to dust off your detective badge, but you should always be alert for something that may not be quite right, something Sara Ganim did in her reporting on Penn State.

In addition, journalism should be looked at as a process with a series of steps, not as a straight line from story idea to story finish. If Frontline had chosen to do one story about concussions in the NFL, it may have caught some people’s attention. However, their Concussion Watch and documentary “League of Denial: The NFL’s Concussion Crisis” created a national discussion about a problem that has been ignored for far too long. I just wish ESPN had also used its clout for positive change instead of allowing its business interests to supplant its journalistic duties.

Being accurate from the start is critical. Problems arise because news organizations want to be the first to have the story, but this can lead to inaccurate information being released. Incorrect information causes rumors to start, which was shown by the initial reporting on the Newtown shooting.

It is a little suspect that fairness and balance are two suggested substitutes for truthfulness when these are integral parts of Fox News branding. As someone who watches this channel on a regular basis, I think fairness and balance can be effective benchmarks. Fairness involves treating sources and subject matter with the respect and attention they deserve. Balance is about taking various factors into consideration and devoting the appropriate attention to each part.

However, by supporting Fox News, I am also supporting a journalism of affirmation. When I watch “The Five,” I know I will likely agree with many of the opinions voiced by the panelists. However, I also check out CNN and the New York Times for a more balanced view of the world. While I may lean toward the conservative end of the spectrum, as an educated person and journalist, I want to hear as many distinct viewpoints as possible.

The same story can be covered in completely different ways, which is why it is important to look to other organizations that do not necessarily affirm your beliefs. It is interesting how Fox and CNN have chosen to cover the case of one Texas woman. At Fox, they focused on how a pregnant woman was taken off of life support. While at CNN, the emphasis is on a brain-dead woman being removed from a ventilator.

News organizations that are adding context and interpretation are not heading in the right direction. People are constantly on the go and not in the mood to read copious amounts of text. This is one reason I like looking at USA Today because of its concise reporting. When I see a webpage full of text and analysis, I am most likely going to search for a shortened version of what happened somewhere else.

Tell me “where the good stuff is,” and I will return day in and day out.

ME Chapter Three – Journalism and Public Relations: The Quintessential Struggle

It amazes me that the field of public relations has only been around since the late 1800s, while journalism has been around for centuries. My best friend graduated from UF with a degree in public relations, and there were times I considered switching my major.

I think journalism students have a better ability to cross over to the PR sector because we can develop our publicity skills. However, I think it is much more difficult for someone in public relations to make the jump to journalism. Having to transition from promoting to strictly informing is a leap not everyone can make.

Sometimes, I wish we heard more news from the eyes of public relations professionals. While I want the news to accurately reflect what is going on, I also would not mind positive news finding its way into the mix every once in a while. For example, seeing a WCJB story about a program to assist in providing prom and wedding dresses for those who cannot afford them makes me realize there are good people in the world. We may not live in a land of fairy tales and rainbows, but some happy stories can go a long way in helping people see wonderful things happening in the world around them.

The idea of synergy brings up a lot of questions about the future interactions of journalism and PR in a world where corporations seem to be double dipping. News Corp owns the New York Post and News America Marketing. News America Marketing is the “premier marketing partner of some of the world’s most well-known brands,” according to the News Corp website. I am critical of this because it is hard for the journalistic properties to focus on being a watchdog when another branch is concerned with pleasing advertisers.

This is also an issue with companies who work in both the news and entertainment fields. Fox Entertainment Group has several branches, including filmed entertainment, television stations, television broadcast and cable network programming. Whose interests will be supreme and can the news apparatus remain independent? When I see instances where other branches are manufacturing positive feedback, I do not think their paths can remain uncrossed.

“Rashômon” (Akira Kurosawa) 1950

“Rashômon” is one of a handful of foreign language films I have watched during my entire life. While the four different accounts contributed to an interesting story, I was struck by several of the translated quotes.

As the men are discussing strange events that transpired, one man says, “It’s human to lie. Most of the time we can’t even be honest with ourselves.” These statements seem as though they could have been made yesterday when they were actually made more than 60 years ago.

What is even more telling is how the other man responds. He states, “I don’t care if it’s a lie, as long as it’s entertaining.” Is this why Star magazine continues to be swept off of supermarket shelves week after week?

Today, the media seems to be more focused on entertainment instead of providing an education about the issues we are facing. People want to be entertained, so are news organizations just giving the people what they want? I am assuming this is why Justin Bieber being arrested in Miami Beach was the top story on every news outlet. I do not think the latest escapade of a 19-year-old singer is the most important event to have occurred in the last week. However, the coverage seems to indicate otherwise.

This relates to another idea expressed in the film. “Man just wants to forget the bad stuff and believe in the made-up good stuff.” However, is it ethical to manufacture news for any reason? Personally, I feel like this goes against everything we are taught as journalists. If I wanted to make up stories, I would have become a children’s book author.

The issue arises because we are all suckers for a good story. Manti Te’o was and still is a talented football player. Instead of focusing on his athletic abilities, Te’o became the darling of college football as he played with greater drive and fierceness after suffering the loss of two people he cared about. We were all drawn in. The problem was the story that warmed our hearts was not true.

Journalism is at a critical juncture, so we must determine how the focus will return to the truth instead of lies and made-up stories. Without an ethical foundation, we may as well be replaced by aggregating computer programs.

Discussion Question

Why does parenting only seem to be a part of the media’s discussion when a female candidate or politician is involved?

Texas gubernatorial candidate Wendy Davis is the latest female politician to have her parenting placed under a microscope. What is the evidence being used to smear Davis as a bad mother? She attended Harvard Law School, while her husband stayed home in Texas with her two daughters. If we were talking about a man, I do not think this would be an issue. An ambitious man is respected for making sacrifices in his personal and professional life. However, our society has a problem with goal-setting women who want to have careers, in addition to being mothers. As Sheryl Sandberg, the COO of Facebook, has said, “We expect people to adhere to stereotypes…The stereotype of men is: leadership qualities. Leader, decisive, going to make things happen. The stereotype of women are communal qualities. Caregiving, sensitive. Because we expect those qualities to be in opposition to each other, it means when a woman does anything other than be nice first, she’s judged badly.” These views continue to be purported by the media, which constructs a version of reality that the public sees as acceptable. While a person’s parenting may speak to his or her character, the media should address this issue for both female and male candidates.

Link to Ethical Issue of the Week

Net neutrality has been discussed since the dawn of the Internet. It is the idea that Internet Service Providers (ISPs) should allow the same access to applications and content regardless of where they are coming from. In this ideal world, someone could search for my blog and visit Perez Hilton without any difference in connection or speed. Net neutrality also promoted an equal playing field that did not allow ISPs to favor certain content providers. Under net neutrality, Comcast provided equal service to ABC and NBC, even though the company has ties to NBC. However, this is all likely to change because of a court ruling by the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in Verizon v. Federal Communications Commission. How will this affect us? Internet providers, such as Comcast and Verizon, can give special treatment to certain content providers for a fee.  Independent bloggers and small businesses will not be able to compete with the Huffington Post and Walmart. I also wonder where this will leave citizen journalists who can provide a voice for issues that go unnoticed in communities across the country. Is it ethical for those who have more resources to pay more for better access to audiences and potential customers? I do not solely want to hear from news organizations and conglomerates with lots of money. I want to get thoughts about trendy restaurants from Gainesville’s Lunch Out Blog, not restaurants in other cities recommended by the Food Network. As Kovach and Rosenstiel discuss, corporatism is a threat to journalism as we know it. This court decision appears to be a victory for big business and a major loss for all of the little guys.

Questions from Dr. Rodgers – Vocabulary Terms

• “Bread and circuses:” Something offered in the hopes of pacifying discontent or distracting people’s attention away from a particular event or issue. Juvenal, a Roman poet and satirist, coined the term as he watched Roman politicians trying to placate discontent by distracting citizens from the issues they were facing.
• Media Example: The coverage of whistleblower Edward Snowden has revealed many interesting story lines. Government officials from the CIA, NSA and Defense Department are quick to call Snowden a “traitor” and point  to how he jeopardized the safety of American citizens. However, this is being used to distract from what the leaks revealed about the NSA. As a public, we are easily distracted. The coverage will likely focus on the “unpatriotic” Snowden until another big story comes and people lose interest.
• Edward Bernays: Often referred to as the “Father of Public Relations.” He revolutionized what came to be known as public relations by emphasizing the use of endorsements from celebrities, doctors and other exports. In addition, he would release experiment and survey results to further publicize various products. Bernays was a prominent factor in the societal shift that made it acceptable for women to smoke in public. Their cigarettes were referred to as “torches of freedom.” It is interesting that he came out against smoking in subsequent years, as well as being a participant in anti-smoking campaigns. Later in life, he tried to get legislation passed in Massachusetts and other states to require licenses for public relations practitioners because he was disappointed that “any dope, any nitwit, any idiot can call him or herself a public relations practitioner.”
• Truth: When discussed in the journalistic sense, it is more than accuracy or getting the facts correct. It requires sorting out the details in a process that occurs between the initial story and the involvement of journalists, newsmakers and the public. Truth requires tests of correspondence and coherence, which means getting the facts straight and making sense of these facts.
• Objectivity: Can be simply defined as divorcing fact from opinion. However, the Pew Research Center’s Journalism Project says it is not meant to mean journalists do not have biases. For journalists, it is about having “a consistent method of testing information—a transparent approach to evidence—precisely so that personal and cultural biases would not undermine the accuracy of their work.”
• “The world outside and the pictures in our heads:” Walter Lippmann’s title for the first chapter of Public Opinion. In this book he said, “News and truth are not the same thing….The function of news is to signalize an event. The function of truth is to bring to light the hidden facts, to set them into relation with each other, and make a picture of reality upon which men can act.” Lippmann believed the media did not report the truth in the news. Instead, they provided a picture that was greatly distorted and incomplete.
• Construction of reality: The idea that a single reality does not exist. The mass media does not provide a picture of reality, it presents a manufactured interpretation of what reality is. By consuming media, we may subscribe to that particular reality being shown to us. As a young girl, I loved playing with my Barbie dolls. However, these dolls provide a false sense of reality to young women. If you saw Barbie walking down the street today, “She would be 5’9’ tall, have a 39” bust, an 18’ waist, 33’ hips and a size 3 shoe.” In other words, this would be a woman facing an eating disorder and issues with menstruation.
• Synoptic: Providing a general view of a whole or displaying conditions as they occur over a broad area.
• Synoptic Gospels: The Gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke in the New Testament that share similar content, structure and wording. A mathematical comparison demonstrates that 91 percent of Mark’s Gospel is featured in Matthew, and 53 percent of Mark is also found in Luke. Questions about the independence of these writings constitute the Synoptic Problem.
• Rashômon Effect: When different people give contradictory accounts of the same event during a quest to find out the truth. Lawyers and judges often see this when witnesses provide conflicting testimony.

Cassie Vangellow, cvangellow@ufl.edu

Blog Essay Week 3

EJ Chapter One

It is hard for me to comprehend the struggle Anna Semborska and other people in Poland went through to access news that was not censored or filtered. Even though I do not condone what Edward Snowden did, we have journalists like Glenn Greenwald to tell stories that make us question our government.

In four years of studying journalism, I have never been posed the question “what is journalism for?” Journalism allows information gatherers to connect with those who want information about various subjects. Today, these information gatherers are not only people with journalism degrees or staff writers from the New York Times. A stay-at-home mom posting on her blog about issues at the neighborhood playground would qualify as an information gatherer providing information to other people. While this may be considered reporting, the question still remains whether these citizens are journalists.

Kovach and Rosenstiel said journalism’s primary purpose is to provide citizens with the information they need to be free and self-governing. As Americans, we often take for granted having a freedom of speech and press. We look at CNN or Washington Post applications on our phones, not realizing people in many parts of the world are cut off from this sort of information.

Even though we are in the United States, we need to be aware of factors that want to challenge the tenets of journalism that our founders fought for, including corporatism. As an avid lover of all things Disney, I like to think the Walt Disney Company has upstanding business practices and takes care of all their employees. However, I am sure there are issues and scandals. It is difficult for me to trust any report from ABC because the network is a part of the Disney family.

I disagree that defining journalism would limit its power. While I do not think a checklist saying journalism contains a specific number of sources or words is appropriate, I think a definition could eliminate certain entities from saying they work in the field of journalism. I love Google News because it brings me to sources that I would never think to go to. However, it is an aggregator benefitting from the efforts of journalists around the world.

It is refreshing that a majority of journalists still think their main role is revealing the truth so people have the information they need to be sovereign. This belief extends back to the theory of a free speech and press that was incorporated into our nation’s laws. Without this foundation, we may not have ever found out the truth of the Vietnam War.

Until relatively recently, the focus was on print media. We looked to the major news beacons, such as the New York Times, Washington Post and Wall Street Journal, for what was important. This has drastically changed with the advent of computers and the Internet. We do not have to wait for the paper to be delivered the next morning because we have 24/7 access to the news. We not only have the ability to view the news but the opportunity to comment and interact with others. If people think a journalist is bias, they can address this in the comments section. While this invites “trolls,” it also enables thought-provoking discussion among people in different states and regions, something that is not possible in print.

The growing “we media” both scares and excites me. With the increase in the number of citizen journalists, I worry about the future of a profession I paid money to study. However, I think this pales in comparison to all the positives. New voices are being heard, and new niches are being unveiled. I plan to move to Washington, D.C. for law school next fall. As I prepare for this transition, I have many questions, including where to live, eat, etc. However, I also wonder how young women should dress in the nation’s capital. Searching for this information brought me to A Lacey Perspective, a chronicle of a D.C. resident’s fashion choices. This may not be hard news, but it provides me with the information I am interested in.

Creative blogs are fun to read, but I simultaneously fear they are distracting people from real world news. When Jay Leno asked various Americans questions from the citizenship test, I lost faith in humanity. I agree with Walter Lippmann that the press distorts the news to some degree, but I also think people’s inattentiveness and ignorance is as much to blame. However, I do not support getting rid of democracy. My views align with John Dewey because democracy allows people to grow and mature. As journalists, we have a responsibility to broadcast the news, so the public can learn, evaluate and make decisions.

As we determine what to broadcast, we must keep in mind the idea of the Theory of the Interlocking Public. This is the idea that people will have different levels of interest based on the issue and whether it affects them in any way. I care deeply about issues in higher education because it has a direct influence on me. However, I pay a lot less attention to news about life insurance policies because I am not at a place in my life where this is a concern.

New technology, conglomeration and globalization are changing journalism’s focus on citizen building. However, I think these changes also bring strengths. Technological advancements allow us to see documents supporting stories, as well as links to related information. For example, gaining access to voice message transcripts left by Richie Incognito for Jonathan Martin changed this bullying narrative. Saying he has engaged in bullying behavior is one thing, but seeing the evidence cemented his status as a tormenter.

Change is imminent, but it should hopefully bring a more transparent and able news force.

ME Chapter Two

As journalists, communicating truth is part of our job description. What constitutes the truth? It seems when it comes to the freshman 15, The Alligator is having an issue telling fact from fiction.

When I see that the Greeks focused on memory and passing the truth orally, I think back to the telephone game played in elementary school. If the message started off as “I wear pink pajamas,” it would turn into something like “Where is the banana?” This does not seem like the most effective way to transmit information.

As the philosophy of truth has evolved, I was at first drawn to the Enlightenment’s version of the truth. Truth was seen as something perceived through senses and harnessed through intellect.  A carrot is orange. I know this because I see it, and I have been taught what the color orange looks like. This idea of truth makes a lot more sense to me than Plato’s perfect forms.

The term objectivity is thrown around so much that it has almost lost any sense of meaning. As reporters, we are told to be objective. However, what does this mean? It may mean separating fact from opinion, but is that too simplistic? With all of our individual biases, I wonder whether any article can be truly objective.

I am a strong proponent of convergence journalism with its use of sounds, images and words because I think each component contributes a unique aspect. This is especially important online. If I get to an online article that has no links or videos, I lose interest quickly.  We live in a society that values instant gratification, so we have to give the people what they want. This is likely one reason why BuzzFeed is so popular. This article about the Russian suicide bombers tells me the facts with additional links to comments from Vladimir Putin, as well as a more in-depth CNN article.

I agree with Brent Cunningham about objectivity getting in the way of quality reporting. If pursuing a story about politics, journalists are quick to get a source from the Democratic Party and a source from the Republican Party. However, a story about a topic like abortion could benefit from other sources that do not strictly fit within these categories. I would want to hear from someone who has had an abortion and someone who works at a clinic. To me, this would be a much better article than a story consisting of diatribes from various congressmen.

Another issue that hinders quality reporting is the emphasis on event stories. We get the who, what, where, when and why, and we think we are set. Another deadline is met, and we can go home. We need to get out of this mentality because the audience does not want to only read event stories. At the University of Florida, we have been warned about doing event stories. These were the stories that received low grades during reporting because they do not require imagination or initiative.

Along with this, there is the issue of “pack journalism.” I admit to being a part of this for one of my first reporting stories. I covered a new exhibit at the Florida Museum of Natural History. I was excited until I saw several other reporting students with their notebooks in hand walking around the museum. I learned this event-style reporting was not going to get me published or noticed. During an assignment for WUFT, I decided to depart from the pack in my coverage of the Gainesville Downtown Festival and Art Show by doing a profile on the featured poster artist.

When it comes to deception in journalism, I have very little tolerance. This may be me being naive, but we have no credibility if we do not tell the truth.  Personally, I do not think flattering a source is deceptive behavior. A little sucking up is not going to hurt anybody, and it may be the edge that gets you the interview.

We have learned about the importance of news values, such as proximity, timeliness, conflict and prominence since our introduction to journalism course. However, I think having a list of ethical news values is a good idea. Of these values, I think confirmation and tenacity are the most important. Stories should be able to stand on their own and withstand the fact checking process. In addition, some stories require journalists to go the extra mile in their reporting. By being tenacious, you may be able to thrive in a journalism market where jobs are being terminated.

Stories should be fact checked for accuracy and balance. A trust exists between journalists and readers, so journalists must work to make sure their work can withstand scrutiny. Putting in the best possible effort to get the best results should be a life mantra regardless of what you are doing. As journalists, no rock should be left unturned in a quest to cover a story. Instead of standing by with the rest of the reporters, be like Stanley Forman and come at your story from a different perspective.

Case Study 2-A Can I Quote Me on That?

Until reading this case study, I had never heard of quote approval. While I knew that checks for accuracy were common to make sure the facts or quotes were correct, I never thought of quotes having to be approved. If something is said on the record, I think a journalist has the right to print that information. Prominent figures, including politicians, want to be placed in the best light, but this should not give them a free pass to control the news connected to them down to the finest detail. That being said, in the competitive field of journalism, I understand why journalists grant this privilege to some people they are covering. If they do not extend this privilege, they may not be able to cover their beat, which means these journalists will soon be replaced by someone who can get access to the right sources. I guess this is why quotes during the election sound as though they have been perfectly prepared to get a message across with the hopes of offending as few people as possible.

Micro Issues

1.) Citizens need information about candidates’ and politicians’ views on issues. However, what should journalists be willing to give up in order to obtain that information?

Even though I think the practice of quote approval is wrong, journalists need to be willing to grant quote approval to candidates and politicians. However, I do think they should agree to a compromise with the candidates and politicians based on what they say on the record. As a journalist, you want to convey the truth to the audience, not some semblance of the truth the politicians want to purport. The agreement should be that you will agree to a check of quotes, but you also have the right to utilize what they say  on the record during the course of an interview. Candidates and politicians are well-trained machines, so it is likely they will rarely slip up. As Patterson and Wilkins said, it is a power struggle. Unfortunately, those with the information have the upper hand.

2.) How reliable is information obtained after a politician or his or her advisers have massaged or altered quotes?

These quotes are a watered-down version of what the politician is actually trying to say. Politicians are often thought of as smooth talkers, and many learned this behavior from one of the best, Bill Clinton. In August of 1998, Clinton’s statement about his involvement with Monica Lewinsky included a somber Clinton admitting his mistakes. “Our country has been distracted by this matter for too long, and I take my responsibility for my part in all of this. That is all I can do.” I doubt there is a better way for a chief executive to admit to having a sexual relationship with an intern. My point is that while the information may be accurate overall, it is curtailed to avoid any controversy or bad publicity.

3.) Are there certain sorts of stories, for example stories about science or finance, where this practice might be more acceptable? Why or why not?

In these types of stories about complex topics, accurate information is of the highest importance. If a story about a stock market development is incorrectly reported on, people who listen and invest based on the article may lose a lot of money. What if a story talks about the equations and chemicals involved in an experiment but one compound is noted incorrectly? Recent reports have said that smoking causes other serious health problems, in addition to lung cancer. With all the statistics in these stories, it is important to be accurate. If a statistic is one in 13, but the reporter writes one in 33, this is a major problem. Triple checking this information is integral for informed reporting.

Midrange Issues

1.) Quote approval is for newspaper journalists. Should there be such a thing as video approval? What would be the morally relevant distinctions?

Video approval causes me concern because video editing can be utilized to provide a different picture than what actually happened. If the candidate asks you to cut out a question from one angered voter, are you not altering what happened? If there is a video of a press conference or rally, it should be used to show people who could not attend what happened. With print journalism, I think readers expect that various quotes from an interview will not be used in a final article. However, I think people expect videos to give them the full picture. Many people say seeing is believing, so I would hate to trick viewers by engaging in video approval.

2.) Should reporters disclose to their readers when they have submitted a story for quote approval? Kovach and Rosensteil (2007) argue that journalism’s first obligation is to the truth, and journalists’ first loyalty is to citizens. Journalists should report honestly to their readers (Associated Press 2012) and should disclose unavoidable conflicts (Society of Professional Journalists 2012).

At the bottom of stories where quote approval was employed, I think journalists need to put an asterisk and a short message like “Candidate X’s campaign approved the quotes used in this story during the quote approval process. This paper’s policy on quote approval is….” This allows journalists to get access to an important source, but it also allows them to maintain their credibility with their readership. I think this is a compromise candidates and politicians should accept because by being transparent, they may be better received by their constituencies.

3.) How is quote approval related to truth?

Quote approval follows from the pragmatist view of truth. This philosophy says that truth is filtered through individual perception. Truth depends on how it was investigated and on who was doing the investigating. Candidates and politicians want to make sure quotations attached to them are accurate, so they are delivering their notion of the truth.

Macro Issues

1.) Media based on social responsibility is premised on the idea that freedom of expression is a positive freedom (Nerone 1995). The moral right of freedom of expression is not unconditional (The Commission of Freedom of the Press 1947) but a right granted to do moral good (Nerone 1995). By agreeing to “quote approval” are reporters opening the debate as to whether they are serving the best interests of the public or serving the interests of politicians? How would you respond to this question?

Journalists are put in a tough position. They are responsible for providing the news to the public, but they cannot provide any news if they do not have access. I do not think they are solely serving the interests of the politicians when they engage in quote approval. They are doing what they need to do in order to gain access to information sources so they can best serve the public. Ultimately, journalists should put a note on any stories where quote approval is used to avoid the accusation of not being fully transparent with their audience.

2.) How does the notion of citizen journalism influence the concept of quote approval? Of candidates willingness to speak “off the cuff” with citizens?

What constitutes a citizen journalist is still under debate. However, I think citizens have more of an ability to refuse to grant quote approval. They are concerned citizens, not people who have to work with these sources time and time again. Citizen journalists do not have editors breathing down their necks when a source refuses to talk to them. These journalists and bloggers can also focus on stories that traditional media choose not to, something Trent Lott knows a lot about.  I hope citizens continue to attend press conferences and events to provide the public with details that we cannot get elsewhere. A quote from a politician to one of these citizens may be enough to get the rest of the press and public talking.

Case Study 2-D When Is Objective Reporting Irresponsible Reporting?

This case study provides an interesting look at a dilemma we are all likely to face. When covering a story that has one official on one side and another official on the other, it is easy to grab quotes from each and call it a day. However, as journalists we must check to see whether what both sides are saying is accurate. If this information is incorrect, that should be the story instead of a petty political disagreement.

Micro Issues

1.) Did Laurens do the right thing by submitting her story without the benefit of an independent investigation into the mayor’s accusations about Councilman Michaels?

No, she did not. We have all been under the pressure of deadline, but this does not justify sloppy reporting. She called both parties involved, but she did not dive into finding out what the real issue was. If she had, she would have learned that Councilman Michaels had never lied about the effects of pesticides on bird life, and he had never been on the payroll of any pesticide manufacturer.

2.) Is the mayor correct in arguing that Laurens acted responsibly by providing fair and balanced coverage of both sides of a public controversy without trying to judge whose side is right and whose side is wrong?

In this situation, the mayor is pleased because the article put him in a positive light. He is being transparent by pointing a figure at someone “involved in” corrupt practices. As journalists, it is not our job to say which side is right or wrong. We must provide the facts in an objective manner, which will then allow the public to make an informed decision.

3.) Is the councilman correct in arguing that Laurens acted irresponsibly by concerning herself only with reporting the facts truthfully and ignoring the “truth about the facts?”

I agree with the councilman because Laurens did not perform her due diligence on this story. Laurens should have investigated to see whether the allegations were true before printing them. While Laurens had no intention of defamation, these words are libelous toward the councilman because it asserts that he is a “paid liar.” Once information like this is printed, it is very hard to correct the facts with the public.

Midrange Issues

1.) Is it sufficient when covering public controversies to simply report the facts accurately and fairly? Does it matter that fair and accurate facts might not do justice to the truth about the facts?

No, it is not sufficient. These politicians have an interest in the “facts” being discussed in this situation. It is up to the journalist to check these facts for accuracy before reporting on them. During reporting, a source gave me a statistic. Instead of checking the information, I trusted the source and put the material into my story. This led to receiving my sole fact error of the semester. I was so annoyed with myself for not questioning the information to find out if it were true. I learned my lesson that information, whether from a source or document, needs to be verified.

2.) Does the practice of objective reporting distance reporters from the substance of their stories in ways contrary to the ideals of responsible journalism?

Journalists have a duty to separate fact from opinion, but this should not prevent journalists from chasing down all aspects of a story. This relates to the ethical news values of tenacity and sufficiency. Stories should be able to withstand the scrutiny from editors and readers. This story should have raised red flags immediately, especially with an allegation on one side and a denial on the other. My first question would be who is telling the truth? With sufficiency, enough resources should be devoted to important issues. Laurens should have contacted several pesticide manufacturers about whether the councilman had ever worked for them. In addition, she should have compared what Councilman Michaels had said about the effects of pesticides on bird life to scientific research. By going above and beyond, Laurens would have found a great scoop and eliminated the embarrassment of posting the original story.

3.) If reporters serve as the eyes and ears of their readers, how can they be expected to report more than what they’ve heard or seen?

This is just a saying, but journalists do have the ability to report on issues and movements that the public does not have time to investigate. This also relates to tenacity because journalists should attempt to cover all aspects of the story. If they do not, much of the information will never reach the public. Consider what would have happened if Woodward and Bernstein had not done everything in their power to uncover the mystery that turned into Watergate.

Macro Issues

1.) What distinguishes fact from truth? For which should journalists accept responsibility?

When considering the differences between fact and truth, I am going to look at it from the perspective of a pragmatist. Truth is “what is filtered through individual perception.” After I look to the facts, I might use what I have learned to tell a truth. Truth can be relative, so I have the ability to include what I want to include. A fact is accurate information that is regarded as being correct by experts and greater society. Journalists must accept the responsibility to write stories using facts. A source may tell them a true statement, but they have the obligation to check to see how it measures up against the facts.

2.) If journalists know that a fact is not true, do they have an obligation to share that knowledge with their readers? And if they do share that knowledge, how can they claim to be objective in their reporting?

Absolutely. Even if they do not say flat out that a source was wrong, the story should include the accurate fact, not what the source said is fact. If they choose not to, their credibility and livelihood as a journalist is at stake. They can claim to be objective because they are not inserting their opinion into the story. The information is accurate or not accurate regardless of how they personally feel about a source or issue. This is not about personal feelings or views but reporting based on the highest ethical and journalistic standards.

3.) Justify or reject the role of objectivity in an era when more media outlets are available than ever before.

Objectivity is as important as ever in today’s world. While the increase in the number of opinion sites provides a positive forum for people to converse with people who share their views, this should remain separate from hard news. When I watch ABC News or CNN, I want the facts, not the views of any particular anchor. If I want editorializing, I will watch “The Daily Show.” News and opinion must be distinctive entities to prevent the further blurring of lines.

Case Study 2-F Murdoch’s Mess

Nick Davies deserves credit for pursuing a story after other members of the British press decided there was nothing else to report on. It disgusts me that this phone hacking included conversations that should have remained private, including the voicemails of the murdered Milly Dowler. Journalists want to gain access, but they should pursue leads through ethical means. It disgusts me the lengths Rupert Murdoch and his employees were willing to go. I am glad to see he is facing some repercussions for his actions, including the end of News of the World and his bid withdrawal from BSkyB. Hopefully, he has learned some valuable life lessons so these issues won’t bring down the Wall Street Journal and Fox News.

Micro Issues

1.) Phone hacking is illegal, but is it unethical? Why or why not?

Yes, it is both illegal and unethical. If we define ethics as a “rational process founded on certain agreed-on principles,” it is easy to see that phone hacking would not be included as ethical behavior. “Thou shalt not steal” is one of the Ten Commandments. While we are not dealing with morals and religion, this idea is widely agreed upon and codified into law. Phone hacking is a form of stealing because you are gaining access to people’s private conversations without just cause or permission. I have zero respect for journalists who engage in this behavior.

2.) How would you, or could you, justify Davies’s pursuit of this story about one of his major competitors?

Davies’s pursuit of this story was not based on his desire to bring down his competitor. He was not convinced that the phone hacking was an isolated case at the News of the World. He had the tenacity to follow this story until the very end. He was not only rewarded with a one-of-kind story away from the pack, but he also saw justice when those involved were held responsible for the crimes they have committed. Personally, I think we should aspire to be more like Davies.

3.) In most of the phone hacking cases, none of the victims have said that the information collected about them was untrue. Is the way a journalist collects information a component of the truthfulness of the story?

The information being true has no bearing on whether this behavior is acceptable. These journalists broke the trust of these people by hacking into their phone lines. How a journalist reports a story definitely influences the truthfulness of the story, especially when it was obtained through illegal means. It would be hard to ever trust another story written by any of the journalists involved.

4.) Contrast phone hacking to the other deceptive techniques evaluated by investigative reporters and editors reviewed in this chapter. How are they alike and different in an ethical sense?

On the deception continuum, phone hacking is right up there with lying to readers, viewers and listeners. This hacking is a type of lie because readers and audiences will assume the information was obtained through an interview or other legal means. This behavior is very different from flattering a source. A journalist may have to be slightly sweeter to get a source to talk, but this pales in comparison to phone hacking. There is absolutely no excuse for breaking the law. When considering lying by omission or commission, I have more of a problem with lying by commission. While all the facts should be laid out and not omitted, it is problematic when a journalist tells a lie on purpose. Journalists who engage in this behavior may be on a slippery slope to phone hacking.

Midrange Issues

1.) What is the role of competition in the concept of “watching the watchdog”? Does the same sort of thinking apply to the media’s watchdogging of other major institutions in society?

News organizations are competing to attract the most readers and hits. However, this situation was different. I do not think Davies was driven by bringing down Murdoch’s media empire. It is refreshing to see that someone is out there keeping an eye on the media. Members of the public are often quick to assume that whatever the news says is the whole story. The public also seems more accepting of the media’s watchdog function of other institutions, such as schools and assisted living facilities. We need to be open to both functions so behavior like this does not slip through the cracks.

 2.) Does the 24/7 nature of the news cycle—and the sometimes Wild West nature of the Internet—encourage working at the very edge of acceptability? If you answer yes, then what sort of rules or guidelines or training might encourage contemporary journalists to stay on the “right” side of the ethical boundaries?

No, I think it provides opportunity to do even better reporting. By opening Google, you can be connected to sources and information that used to be out of reach. I think some journalists are using the 24/7 news culture as a way to justify sloppy and unethical reporting. News organizations should train their journalists about what is acceptable in this new era.

 3.) In light of this case, how do you respond to those who say that all journalists will do anything to get a story?

People will point to all those unethical journalists at News of the World, but I point to Nick Davies. For every handful of “bad” journalists, there are those who are still in the industry for the right reason: to inform the public of what is going on in the world around them.

Macro Issues

1.) What should be the role of democratic governments in policing the ethical behavior of corporate media owners?

Democratic governments may be able to provide more regulation for ethical behavior of corporate media owners. There should be fines and hearings when reporters cross the line, like what occurred in this case. In addition, these media owners should have to answer to the full force of the law when they do something illegal. As journalists, we are not above the law, something democratic governments need to continue to enforce.

2.) Evaluate the notion of an ethical newsroom culture. Contrast the culture of The Guardian with that of the News of the World. What makes the ethical difference?

These two news organizations do not seem like they could be any more different. An ethical foundation based on a yearly audit, as well as the use of public transportation by journalists, demonstrates how The Guardian works to be open with readers about its journalistic practices. In addition, The Guardian does not have a sole focus on making money because it is part of a trust. This is in sharp contrast to the media empire Murdoch created, including News of the World. Conglomeration and globalization are major factors causing a shift in how journalism is being done, as well as contributing to a shift in ethics. With almost unlimited access to money and other resources, entities like News of the World think they are above the rules.

3.) One role for the mass media as an institution is that of collaboration. Yet, journalists have historically been suspicious of the sort of collaboration and political influence Rupert Murdoch has had. Analyze what you believe is the most ethically defensible role relationship between the mass media as an institution and powerful political and economic institutions. See if your answer changes after reading Chapter 6.

There is a fine line between collaboration and collusion, so I am wary of people like Rupert Murdoch having relationships with political and economic institutions. This is especially problematic because his news organization is covering entities that he has ties to. How can you cover someone or something objectively when you have a relationship with them that relates to finances of policy? I feel news organizations need to refrain from binding ties to other institutions in society because the public needs to trust the media to cover these other groups in a way that is fair and balanced. Collaboration is important in mass media, but these institutions should be avoided.

Discussion Question

Should the Federal Trade Commission regulate native advertising? What guidelines could the FTC implement?

Shape is the latest publication to have had an issue with native advertising. This practice is deceptive because it blurs the line between journalism and advertising. Readers have a right to know which is which, but certain techniques make it difficult to tell. The FTC, a regulatory body that aims to prevent anticompetitive, deceptive or unfair business practices, may have a role to play in addressing this issue.

Link to Ethical Issue of the Week

With the growth of the “we media,” we need to ask ourselves who can claim to be a journalist. In a decision by the 9^th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, First Amendment protections enjoyed by members of the traditional media were extended to individuals posting on the Internet. The case began when Crystal Cox accused Obsidian Finance Group, an Oregon firm that works with financially unstable businesses, of fraud and corruption. Apparently, Cox had a history of posting allegations. When she lost the original defamation case in 2011, many journalists said she did not deserve First Amendment protection because she was not a journalist, something the original trial judge agreed with. The judge said she was not entitled because she had no affiliation to a newspaper, magazine, broadcast station or other news entity. The Supreme Court’s 2010 Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission decision should have been an indication of the changes to come. In that decision, the Supreme Court said, “We have consistently rejected the proposition that the institutional press has any constitutional privilege beyond that of other speakers.” Should citizen journalists have the same rights of journalists who work for traditional media outlets? I hope citizens contributing to the conversation with information and analysis are recognized for their role. However, I am wary of online “trolls” demanding the same rights as journalists who work hard to provide balanced reporting. Only time will tell the implications of this decision.

Questions from Dr. Rodgers – Vocabulary Terms

• Plato’s Cave: Truth is connected to human rationality and intellect. Truth was part of a world of pure forms, a place humans only had indirect access to. For Plato, truth was knowable only to human thought, not something that could be touched or verified. What people considered to be a chair was as similar to the idea chair as the shadows on the wall of the cave when a chair is illuminated. Plato said we are living in this cave.
• Pragmatism: Truth equals what is filtered through individual perception. It is affected by how it is investigated, as well as who is doing the investigation. For pragmatists, knowledge and reality are results of a progressing stream of consciousness and learning.
• Marketplace of Ideas: Competing notions of truth should be allowed to coexist because the ultimate truth will then emerge. Part of Milton’s beliefs that foreshadowed Enlightenment philosophy.
• Partisan Press: Part of the reason that objectivity became a professional standard in the early 1900s. Partisan news organizations could not convince advertisers that their ads would be viewed because their articles coming from a particular partisan viewpoint could offend readers.
• Early 20^th Century Progressive Movement: Pragmatists during this period, especially John Dewey, George Herbert Mead, Charles Sanders Pierce and William James, challenged the Enlightenment version of truth. They argued that truth was relative, depending on how it was investigated and on who performed the investigation. These views challenged objectivity and also influenced literature, science and law.
• Walter Lippmann: A famous journalist who argued in his best-selling book Public Opinion that democracy was fundamentally flawed. His work provided a foundation for the modern study of communication. Lippmann thought people mostly knew the world only through distorted and incomplete pictures provided by the press. Humans also had trouble figuring out the truth because of bias, inattentiveness and ignorance.
• Pseudo Event: News is manufactured daily, and the profession has placed an emphasis on discovering and covering events before competitors. Stories are often missed because they do not fit neatly into an event narrative. This was demonstrated with the lack of coverage of the women’s movement and the civil rights movement until sit-ins and demonstration events were held.
• Coherence Theory of Truth: Truth is discovered through a variety of methods that involve figuring out which set of facts form a coherent mental picture of events and ideas. Blogs, including the Huffington Post, provide words, images and access to other sources. This theory moves away from one method of investigation.
• Marketplace of Ideas Theory: Competing notions should be allowed to coexist because the ultimate truth will rise to the top.
• Interlocking Public: Idea that each member of the audience is interested and expert in something. People are not wholly ignorant or interested in everything. People may be part of an involved public, interested public or uninterested public depending on the issue. People will be parts of different groups based on the issue.

Cassie Vangellow, cvangellow@ufl.edu

Blog Essay Week 2

EJ Preface and Introduction

It is hard to comprehend all the changes journalism has gone through since this book was first released in 2001. As a senior journalism student, I can acknowledge my experience would have been extremely different without Google News, Twitter and WordPress.

The power of blogs cannot be underestimated. With the progression toward a “we media,” there are questions surrounding what constitutes a journalist. An October article from the Huffington Post created a potential framework for a definition. I think the most crucial point for determining whether someone’s work is journalism is if the author has contributed analysis or creativity.

When I was enrolled in law of mass communication, I learned an idea cannot be copyrighted, but the expression of that idea can be copyrighted. I cannot say I own the copyright to all stories about the Gainesville mayor. However, if I wrote a story investigating the mayor being charged with a DUI and what this means for our community, I could copyright this story. Adding insight and analysis should count for something because in our fast-paced world, people are often quick to regurgitate information and call it news.

A journalist is someone who provides news in an analytical or creative fashion to an audience. This profession requires accountability to readers and viewers. Journalists can enhance the communication between themselves and the audience by providing information about where they can be contacted, such as an email address. To be in this profession, journalists must be tenacious and dedicated to covering all aspects of a story. Journalists are communicators of fact, and they must do everything in their power to report in an objective manner.

In a world where we “hunger for awareness,” different media platforms are home to stories waiting to be discovered. I try to begin each morning watching “Good Morning America” because I like to start my day with an overview of what has taken place in the world around me. This knowledge allows me to discuss the issues of the day with my family and co-workers. My dad is a big fan of Governor Chris Christie, so it was interesting to hear his perspective on the traffic scandal.

ME Chapter One

As an indecisive person, I know making these ethical decisions will be difficult. It takes me 30 minutes to choose a movie on Netflix. Putting aside what is morally right or wrong, I am worried about selecting a choice that is good when there is a better or best solution out there.

As an intern at the UF Foundation, I have access to information that would be unethical to release. However, I have never been asked by a supervisor to do something unethical. I hope discussing these scenarios will help with my overall decision making for when I am put in these situations.

The distinction between ethics and morals is something I need to work on understanding. In my original definition of ethics for this course, I said ethics are based on a moral foundation.

Ethics pertain to duties and values. As journalists, we have a duty to report the news. Members of the audience hold us accountable for what we broadcast and write.

In addition to reporting on news that is timely and prominent, we also have a duty to obtain our material in an ethical and legal manner. How would it look if we obtained quotes and leads based on hacking people’s phones and computers? This behavior may be morally wrong, but it is also unethical because it is irrational behavior that is not widely agreed upon.

Upon learning about the various guidelines and principles for approaching an ethical dilemma, Bok’s Model seems to provide the most well rounded analysis. It takes into account how you personally feel about the action, whether there are other alternatives and also takes into consideration how others will respond.

United Way Case Study

The case study about the United Way introduces a lot of issues, including duty as a journalist to tell the truth, credibility of the news organization, implications for the relationship with a source, the possibility of irreversible damage to someone’s career and harm to the community. I look to the principle of utilitarianism that emphasizes the outcome. With this view, a decision may cause pain for one person but be the best decision for the larger group of people. Taking this into consideration, I would reveal the truth for why the executive director is departing. I would also include ways the United Way is preventing a situation like this from ever happening again. Quotes from board members reassuring the public about all the positive efforts being funded with donations would be essential. While I do feel guilty about possibly jeopardizing future employment options for the executive director, work at a nonprofit may not be the right place for him.

Case Study 1-A – Application of Bok’s Model and Five Guidelines for Making Ethical Decisions

Upon seeing this Pulitzer-Prize winning photo, I had a pit in my stomach that it ended in tragedy. I give credit to Stanley Forman for pursuing a different angle, but I also support his decision to not photograph the two girls following their fall.

Bok’s Model

How do you feel about the action?

I think more attention should be brought to fire escapes in Boston and whether they are durable and in working order. A picture is worth 1,000 words, and I think this photo could rally support to improve the safety of fire escapes so this never happens again.

Is there another professionally acceptable way to achieve the same goal that will not raise ethical issues?

An article could be written about the fire and tragedy without the photo. However, people may not pay as much attention. This photo shows the last few moments of a 19-year-old girl’s life. Words on a page may not be able to speak to the gravity of this tragedy.

How will others respond to the proposed act?

Some readers may criticize the paper for including a photo like this because it exhibits an imminent death. Others will applaud the news organization for bringing attention to an issue that has been affecting the oldest areas of the city. You can never make everyone happy, but I think publishing the photo would be the best course of action.

Aristotle’s Golden Mean

I am still struggling with understanding the Aristotelian framework, but I think publishing this photo lies between not wanting to include the photo for fear of reader outrage and including other more gruesome photos. Showcasing this heartbreaking photo lies at the mean of these two extremes that would be unacceptable. Again, I would publish the photo.

Kant’s Categorical Imperative

If I were to publish this photo, would I be okay with other news organizations doing the same? Putting aside the issue of competition, I think this image should be shared to spread awareness. However, Kant emphasizes treating individuals as an end and not as merely a means. It could be claimed that I would be publishing this photo as a means to lead a change in fire escape safety. Taking this into consideration, I would not publish the photo.

Utilitarianism

By releasing this photo, people in power would see how serious of a problem this is. Reform could be made so this never happens again. The greatest number of people would benefit by me publishing this photo. Considering utilitarianism and its emphasis on the outcome that benefits the largest group of people, I would publish the photo.

Pluralistic Theory of Value

I would consider the prima facie duties based on what seems to be right. I would consider a duty of not injuring others because publication could lead to preventative measures. This photo could cause additional pain for family and friends of the two girls, but I would also consider my duty to justice. By publishing this photo, their deaths would not be in vain. The duty proper must also be considered. Based on the circumstances and the attention that should be devoted to this problem, I would publish the photo

Communitarianism

As an individual I must consider how my decisions impact other members of my community. This guideline is critical of sensationalistic tactics because they might provide a false view of what is happening in the community. However, this photo would not be published with the sole aim of making money or attracting readers. The photo could be accompanied with contact information for local officials and details about fire escape safety. Publishing this photo could result in the community discovering this problem and determining a solution that leads to change.

Discussion Question

If your ethics differ from those of a company you are working for, do you complete the work they ask you to do?

The third scenario about the PR professional working with PharMedCo made me wonder what I would do. PharMedCo is withholding information that could result in injury or death to consumers. However, you are being paid to perform a particular task. As an employee, you could lose your job and ability to support your family. The pluralistic theory of value with the competing duties could be helpful in this situation.

Link to Ethical Issue of the Week

When Matt Sheehan brought up drones at the introductory meeting for members of the WUFT news team, I assumed he was joking. However, he showed a video of Weimer Hall recorded by the drone. The Federal Aviation Administration is taking a hard stance on the operation of drones for commercial purposes, including their use for journalism. The University of Nebraska at Lincoln’s College of Journalism and Mass Communications and the University of Missouri School of Journalism received cease-and-desist letters in July. I am hoping Amazon can lead the way for other commercial entities flying drones. Drones have the power to change journalism across the world and even right here in our backyard at the UF College of Journalism and Communications.

Link to Ethical Issue of the Week

I have been following the heartbreaking story of Jahi McMath after she was pronounced dead following a tonsillectomy. Stories related to brain death and vegetative states have received a lot of coverage since the case of Terri Schiavo. These stories bring up a lot of emotions because people do not want to say goodbye to their loved ones, especially after tragic accidents. Until reading this article, I was unaware of the differences associated with a minimally conscious state, vegetative state, coma and brain death. McMath experienced brain death, where there is an “irreversible cessation of all activity in both the brain and the brain stem.” According to one doctor, her body will continue to break down. The Greeks said ethics “was the study of what is good, both for the individual and for society.” I think McMath should be removed from the ventilator because there is no chance for her to recover brain activity. It is unethical for medical professionals to pump air into a corpse at the emotional and financial expense of her family.

Questions from Dr. Rodgers – Vocabulary Terms

• Ethics vs. Morals: Ethics pertains to a rational process based on certain principles that are agreed upon by society as a whole. Morals are typically associated with religion with a focus on right and wrong.
• Aristotle’s Golden Mean: Virtue lies between extremes that vary for each individual. For example, generosity is located between the extremes of stinginess and wastefulness. This principle focuses on the actor.
• Kant’s Categorical Imperative: The two parts of this principle include a person should act as if the choices made could become universal law, and a person should act with an emphasis on the ends, not just the means. This principle focuses on the action not the particular actor involved.
• Utilitarianism: A desirable end for the greatest number. An act may hurt one person, but it may be the best decision for the larger group. There is an emphasis on the outcome.
• Pluralistic Theory of Value: Various values are involved in making ethical decisions. These types of duties include considerations of fidelity, reparation, gratitude, etc. Reaching a decision about actual duties must take into consideration what seems right and the specific circumstances.
• Communitarianism: Decisions are evaluated based on how they will influence greater society. This idea has been linked with the civic journalism movement.

Cassie Vangellow, cvangellow@ufl.edu